| Submit your comments on this article |
| Home Front: Tech |
| "But cookies are good for you" |
| 2005-04-29 |
| A coalition of agencies, publishers and measurement firms hopes to head off a consumer revolt against Internet tracking cookies. Safecount brings together online ad industry leaders to discuss steps to insure the reliability of cookies, which are used throughout Internet advertising for measurement, targeting, frequency capping and research. The group said it would work to safeguard consumer privacy while improving counting systems for advertisers. Surveys by Nielsen//Net-Ratings and Jupiter Research suggested over 40 percent of users delete cookies from their computers monthly. "There are beneficial reasons for consumers to want to have these tools in place," said Cory Treffiletti, svp and managing director of Isobar's Carat Interactive, San Francisco. "We need to support the proper measurement and counting methods out there." Much of the concern stems from spyware-removal software, which often identify Internet cookies as spyware. Treffiletti blames these companies for "preying on consumer fear" of identity theft. He said Safecount hopes to work with the firms to separate cookies from malicious tracking programs. The group's 19 founding members include agencies Carat, Interpublic Group's Universal McCann, WPP Group's mOne and aQuantive's Avenue A/Razorfish; publishers like MSN and About.com; and research firms Dynamic Logic and Luntz Research. Reports in March of the demise of cookies sent tremors through the online ad industry, since without them the Internet would lose its major advantage on many media: measurability. Though research released last week by aQuantive's research unit suggested the cookie surveys greatly exaggerated actual deletion, Nick Nyhan, CEO of Dynamic Logic, said they are a warning shot for advertisers as tracking spreads to other media. "We want to provide a way for the industry as whole to learn and to come to some consensus," he said. Like a coalition of spammers who want to protect "good" spam? |
| Posted by:Anonymoose |